| 
The
South African case has pricked many consciences. South Africa
has more than 4m HIV-positive citizens (out of a population
of 43m), almost none of whom can afford anti-AIDS drugs. South
Africa's health ministry enacted a law in 1997 to allow the
manufacture and import of cheaper copies of patented drugs.
The government argued that this is necessary because hundreds
of thousands of South Africans die every year from diseases,
such as AIDS and tuberculosis, that could be cured, prevented
or alleviated with drugs. But many of these drugs are far
too expensive for a poor country such as South Africa, given
the high prices charged by the firms holding the patents,
which given them a monopoly of at least 20 years. To save
lives, the government argued, it should be able to infringe
these patents under international trade agreements, which
carry exemptions for cases of public-health emergencies. Cipla,
an Indian drug maker, responded to supply drugs for AIDS patients
at a fraction of the prices currently charged by the firms,
which hold the patents. A coalition of 39 drug companies responded
with their lawsuit. But this, in turn, brought down on their
heads a storm of condemnation from around the world. This
near-universal condemnation was summed up by Nelson Mandela,
the revered former president of South Africa, who accused
the firms of charging "exorbitant prices", especially
for drugs to treat HIV and AIDS, which are ravaging Africa.
"That is completely wrong and must be condemned,"
he declared. Soon after, on Thursday April 19th, the drug
companies withdrew their case against the South African government.
This climb down could have far-reaching consequences for the
drug industry and for the price of treatments everywhere.
|
